Introduction
My thesis tackles the contemporary phenomena of the impacts of an increasing need to secure and sustain energy by asking the following questions: 1) To what extent is public perception of solar farms in Gloucestershire positive or negative? 2) Do solar farms impact house prices and land values in Gloucestershire? 3) Green or Greed? Why do farmers decide to place solar panels on their land? . In order to help answer these research questions this chapter will turn to existing debates in the following areas: climate change, sustainability, the importance of solar energy systems, issues surrounding sustainable energy development and what has been done so far to reduce any impacts. These are all important factors because the environment is being damaged and we don’t have infinite resources therefore we need to turn to renewable energy systems to create energy security. However, we need the support of the public as actors and therefore it is crucial to understand how renewable energy systems impact the relationship between people and place so that this information can be used to shape policy in order to create positive relations between society and the environment.
Climate Change
According to Roberts (2011), for the level of carbon dioxide to remain steady in our environment, the flow in and out of the atmosphere must remain stabilized. However, following the industrial revolution, co2 levels in our atmosphere have exceeded the levels that are absorbed and therefore the quantity of greenhouse gasses are increasing each year. One of the causes of this increase is the result of exploiting fossil fuels. Parry et al (2007) argue that climate directly affects our environment and changes in our climate due to greenhouse gases are expected to be the main propeller behind a collapse of our natural systems. In 2007, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that there was a 90% chance that the increased climate is a result of increasing greenhouse gasses and continued in 2014 to publish that if climate change is not tackled, we would see a temperature increase of 2 degrees centigrade higher than temperatures in the 20th century, bringing home the need to address such an important global and local issue (International panel on climate change 2014).
At this current time, climate change is definite and it is bringing with it potential issues such as a rise in sea level, energy use limitations and heightened air pollution. (Hunt and Watkiss 2011). This literature above demonstrates the problem that societies face and one solution to tackle this problem is by making sure we are acting sustainably, which is what I go on to explore next.
Defining Sustainability
Environmental sustainability is “enmeshed in the aspirations of countless programs, places and institutions” (Kates et al 2005 pp. 9) and is becoming increasingly important as we witness some of the effects of environmental degradation. Throughout academic literature the definition of sustainability has many variations, of which I delve into a few.
The Brundtland commission defined sustainability as meeting “the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations” (World commission on environment and development 1987 pp.). However, Taylor (2002) critiqued this definition by arguing that it is difficult to predict what the needs of future generations are as they may evolve from the current needs of the present. An alternative definition for sustainability is suggested by Dodd’s (1997) and Dasgupta (2004) in Dimitrov (2010) and states that sustainability provides the conditions where by humans can live congruently with natural systems. This is echoed by the Financial times Lexicon who propose sustainability acknowledges growth but without causing environmental problems. (Attah 2010). These definitions both highlight the importance of the balanced relationship that is needed between nature and society to survive.
Further definitions of sustainability appear to focus more on the theme of change by suggesting the need for humans to adapt their lifestyles. For example, the UK government proposed that to live sustainably is to “live within our resources” and to do this “we need to achieve more with less” (Dimitrov 2010 pp. 10). The World commission on environment and development report reinforces this theme of change by stating, “ sustainable development is not a fixed harmony but rather a process of change”. (1987 pp. 8)
However varying these definitions may appear, a common theme throughout is the need for sacrifice. But how much are people willing to do this and what challenges does this create?
A move towards sustainability
In order to tackle the issue of climate change that has been previously discussed, the world is trying to combat our environmental problems by implementing sustainable goals on local and global scales. In 1997, the Kyoto protocol was an international agreement that aimed to tackle climate change. It set goals for countries to reduce their co2 emissions. This protocol came into place in 2005, encouraging governments to put strategies and incentives in action. (Attah 2010). Shaw (2002) reflects on the success of the protocol as a solution and identified that it involves more politics than the fairness of the sharing of emissions. Despite Shaw’s critique of the protocol, Kates et al (2005) argue that over the last 40 years, the need to protect our environment has crept more forcefully and successfully into international laws. For example, in the HM Government planning policy statement (2004), it states the government’s energy policy has set goals in order to reduce emissions by 60% by 2050 in order to protect and sustain valuable resources (Roberts 2011). As Roberts (2011) highlights, the need for sustainable development to be weaved throughout our lives is crucial because as a human race we are reliant on the environment, with it’s capital capable of providing services that we can use.
Pros and Cons of renewable energy systems
Renewable energy systems are a way to reach targets set by governments. However there are pros and cons associated with these. In 2014, Stigka et al outlined a few pros and cons of sustainable energy systems. The positives that were highlighted were that these types of systems allow us to tackle environmental problems in a way that provides us with a better quality of life by reducing our use of fossil fuels, as well as decreasing pollution and creating positive local development that doesn’t fluctuate with the global economy unlike fuels such as oil and coal. Above all, renewable energy systems allow society to conserve our planet yet satisfy our demands.
Contrary to these positives, Stigka et al suggest some negatives that are thought to be associated with renewable energy systems. These include a disruption to animals, noise pollution, disturbances to the local community and finally an alteration to the appearance of the landscape. We need energy to function in our day-to-day lives but we cannot carry on creating and using energy in an unsustainable way and as a result we must find ways to cooperate. In the paper it highlights that that individuals can act in a manner that reflects their own desires rather than working together for the greater good. Therefore it is useful to investigate any potential barriers perceived by the public that block the popularity of renewable energy systems in order to help policy makers adjust planning.
The importance of Solar as a sustainable energy system
Sustainable energy is a form of clean energy that is a reliable resource for us to use. This form of energy does not pollute the environment and a key characteristic is that it never runs out. For example, the sun never stops shining and the sea never stops creating waves. Sustainable energy is crucial because electricity is our most useful form of energy yet with a limited fuel supply we have entered into an energy crisis. Therefore sustainable energy offers us a sensible solution.
An increased popularity in sustainable energy has created opportunities for solar power. Solar energy is our largest source of renewable energy with a greater production than consumption rate. (Timilsina et al 2011). Parida et al (2011 pp. 1625) reviews solar panels as a sustainable energy method, noting that it is “ the most abundant, inexhaustible and clean of all renewable energy”. Solar energy captures the heat from the sun and converts it into electrical currents using PV solar panels that can be ground mounted or found on rooftops. It’s importance is argued by Timilsina et al (2011) who state that solar energy is going to play an important role in the protection of our environment. Kurokawa et al (2007) present an astonishing fact that if solar panels were installed on just 4% of the worlds deserts then this production of energy would be enough to meet the world’s current needs. Lancaster University state that the need to reduce carbon emissions has fueled the demand for ground mounted solar panels, causing a change in land use. (2016) However, they highlight that although popularity is building, we are unaware about how solar farms affect the local environment and impact local communities. This is a gap I am excited my thesis will explore.
As identified throughout these readings, the capabilities of solar present themselves as a solution for the future energy challenges that we face. But, “the concrete challenges of sustainable development are at least as heterogeneous and complex as the diversity of human societies and natural ecosystems around the world.” (Kates et al 2005, p. 20). Therefore, although this seems an indisputable solution, what are the impacts of such an energy system?
Issues relating to the social acceptance of solar energy systems
Yuan et al (2011) studied the social acceptance of solar energy technology in the Shandong region in China. They sought to explore the attitudes of those in the fastest growing economy in the world by collecting 1271 questionnaires between June-August 2010. The results of this study were that, there were low levels of support for solar panels with reasons such as age, income and education playing a role in the level of support. Wustenhagen et al (2007) highlights the challenges of low acceptance by suggesting that development of renewable energy systems such as solar power will be difficult to achieve if support is low and therefore it is crucial to increase acceptance in order to propel sustainable energy into everyday living.
Solangi et al (2015) also carried out a study that explored social acceptance of solar energy systems, however this research was focused in Malaysia. The study discovered that factors such as economics, mistrust and lack of information are key drivers that can cause hindrances regarding solar energy development. Of the respondents, 80% stated that incentives would increase social acceptance and therefore this is a point I wish to explore further in my research.
Cheikh et al (2014) studied the determinants of social acceptance of renewable energy systems and found that spatial factors are a major determinant. It is stated in the paper that there is a link between proximity of the renewable energy project and social acceptance. This relates to the issue of ‘NIMBYISM’ (Not In My Back Yard). It is argued that those that live closer to renewable energy systems are more likely to object because they influence their day to day lives. However there is much debate surrounding the term ‘NIMBY’.
Challenging the term ‘Nimby’
It has become apparent through literature that the term ‘Nimby’ (‘not I my back yard’) is contested by many academics. Devine –Wright (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012) is a key academic that challenges the term, arguing in several papers that it provides a simplistic label for those that have genuine emotional responses to certain developments. Throughout his papers, Devine-Wright asserts the need for a new way of thinking that goes further than ‘Nimbyism’. He highlights the ignorant connotations that come with the term and proposes we abandon ‘Nimbyism’ in order to concentrate on the role of place attachment which offers a more complex way of looking at public acceptance. Mcclymont and O’Hare (2008) agree with Devine-Wright by suggesting that the term has been created to dismiss powerful opinions.
In Devine-Wright (2010), Walker et al states that the term ‘Nimby’ homogenizes public attitudes and suggests a negative cycle has been created between developers and local opposition. To break this cycle, Mcclymont and O’Hare (2008) suggest a change from description to explanation when dealing with public opposition. This therefore calls for a greater concentration on sense of place, which I am going to look at to give my research more meaning and complexity regarding the public perception of solar farms.
Place attachment
With these objections of the term ‘Nimby’ in mind, I concentrated on literature relating to place attachment as a framework for understanding and explaining factors that influence public reactions to renewable energy systems. Firstly, it is important to outline how academics have interpreted the concept of place attachment. Corocoran (2002 p. 203) refers to place as a” slippery term that is difficult to define”. However he attempts to describe place as a social construct that is riddled with memories, conjuring feelings of nostalgia and creating strong emotional bonds. Devine-Wright (2009) explains place by stating that it is not just physical characteristics but it encompasses a variety of meanings and emotions that enable us to form a positive connection with well-known settings. He expanded by exploring place identity, arguing that places give us a sense of identity and the threat of change through physical or social alterations can lead to certain objections as a result of feeling threatened. According to Stedman (2002 in Devine-Wright 2009 p. 429), “ we are willing to fight for places that are central to our identities” and therefore a disruption to place identity through adding new feelings, sounds and sights can prompt active opposition.
The relationship between place attachment and responses to energy technologies was first investigated by Vorkinn and Riese (2001) where it was concluded that strong attachment to place correlates with low acceptance. In 2002, Stedman carried out a study that looked at public responses to a new housing development in Lakeshore, USA and found that higher levels of place attachment correlated with strong opposition. To investigate these results further I read that in 2009, there was a proposal for a high voltage power line in the South West of England. In Nailsea, 503 residents were interviewed with 60.4% objecting strongly with place attachment coming out as relatively high. (Devine-Wright 2012)
Reading this literature has thus informed the first question of my research in which I aim to include place attachment to discover whether this influences positive or negative public reaction to solar farms in Gloucestershire.
Socio-demographics
Stigmas towards renewable energy systems can vary depending on socio-demographics. There are varying levels of public acceptance that have been discussed in academic literature, however, not often do you encounter papers that analyse demographic differences. For example, McGowan and Sauter (2005) left out information and explanations regarding the social psychological factors that affect public acceptance. Factors such as gender and age influence public acceptance. For example, The Times suggest that there is stronger support for renewable energy amongst women than men, with 90% of women showing strong support in comparison to 66% of men. The Somerset Council also found that there is higher opposition amongst older generations. (Devine-Wright 2007). Therefore this is a gap I have identified to explore.
House prices and land values
Aside from subjective opinions regarding public perception, I have endeavored to read literature that focuses on the economic impacts of renewable energy projects, in particular, the impacts on house price and land values. I am not going to do a ‘house price impact’ assessment project but I am going to embrace it as factor that affects public responses to solar farms. Despite wind farms having a rather different set of impacts to solar, I begin by exploring the impacts of wind farms on house prices as a starting point because there has currently been more research carried out on wind.
In 2014, Droes and Koster published a research paper that looked at the effects of wind turbines on house prices in the Netherlands from 1985-2011. The results of which showed that houses within a 2km radius reduced their value by 1.4-2.3%. However, in contrary to this, Atkinson-Palombo and Hoen (2014) investigated if home values were subject to change as a result wind turbines by looking at over 122,000 homes that were sold near wind turbines between 1998-2012 in Massachusetts, USA. They found that there was no impact. Similarly, Hoen et al (2011) looked at the effect of 24 wind farms in the USA and also identified no impact.
However, in 2007, Ladenburg and Dubgaard discovered that in Denmark, households were willing to pay 122 euros extra to increase their distance from a wind farm. These results are echoed by Collinson (2014), where it is written that Gibbons claimed that households would pay £600 a year in the UK to avoid having to live within a 2km radius of a wind farm. The London School Of Economics have also found results that argue large wind farms can knock 12% off house prices that are located visibly within a 2km radius. (Collinson 2014) Another study by Dent and Sims (2007) looked at a number of wind farms in Cornwall and identified that there is more of an impact on properties that are located within a mile of a wind farm, with little or no effect on houses that are beyond a mile radius of a wind farm. However, It is stated in this research paper that estate agents said that those properties which were close to wind farms, were in fact less desirable anyway and had other deterring factors.
Such literature has shown a mixed bag of results, with some studies suggesting that wind farms do impact house prices but with others saying there is no statistical significance to prove that this is the case. Solar Panels create no noise, no shadows and aren’t imposing due to the low height of the project and therefore we cannot expect the impacts to be mirrored to those of wind farms when looking at house prices. However, I can use this literature to compare and contrast my findings and it has enabled me to identify solar to be under researched and therefore an angle I wish to take.
Due to the change in the use in land, there is a gap in literature where by greater attention can be paid to land values, as there is already a substantial amount on house prices, which is another distinctive angle I endeavor to explore.
Reducing negative public reactions and fostering support
In order to overcome issues and reduce the negative impacts on the public, Cass et al (2010) suggests that the provision of community benefits has noticeably grown in the UK. In the paper, it discusses the actions that have been taken by developers to reduce the negative consequences of such constructions. The paper concentrates more on the description of community benefits rather than researching how such benefits are distributed. However, the information outlined by Cass et al is useful when understanding the type of strategies put in place to reduce negative impacts. It draws attention to a guide produced by the government that outlines four possible types of community benefits. These are community benefits (where by the developer can pay a sum of money to the community), Benefits in kind (which is where the developers pay money directly into facilities or improvements for the community such as in improved education), Local ownership (the community can become actively involved and own shares in the energy system) and finally, local contracting (developer uses local contractors to build the project). Cass et al looked at 10 case studies across the UK and found that 4/10 renewable energy systems had community funds in action, 3/10 experienced benefits in kind and 4/10 used local contracting. According to OFWW developer, “ something that seems to be quite common in the industry…they’re wanting to pay money to the community that they’re supposedly affecting”. (Cass et al 2010, p. 260). Terwel et al (2014) stated that community incentives produce a more positive view of renewable energy systems and lead to higher levels of acceptance. This is suggested by Devine-Wright et al (2016) to be because it creates higher levels of trust, which is essential to a positive outcome.
However, the implementation of community benefits does not always lead to acceptance. Walker and Devine Wright (2008) argue that distribution of benefits can create tensions. Although types of community benefits have been identified by academic literature, it is difficult to find out to what extent community benefits alter public opinion and whether they are viewed as benefits or bribes by those that are receiving them. Therefore there is scope for more research here because there is little literature on community benefits in the context of solar.
2017-1-5-1483617625